NRS 48.109 Closure
of meeting held to further resolution of dispute; exclusion of admission,
representation or statement made during mediation proceedings; confidentiality of
matter discussed during mediation proceeding.

NRS 48.125 Withdrawn
plea of guilty or guilty but mentally ill or offer to plead guilty or guilty
but mentally ill not admissible; plea of nolo contendere or offer to plead nolo
contendere not admissible.

NRS 48.015“Relevant evidence” defined.As
used in this chapter, “relevant evidence” means evidence having any tendency to
make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of
the action more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

(b) As limited by the Constitution of the United
States or of the State of Nevada; or

(c) Where a statute limits the review of an
administrative determination to the record made or evidence offered before that
tribunal.

2. Evidence which is not relevant is not
admissible.

(Added to NRS by 1971, 780)

NRS 48.035Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice,
confusion or waste of time.

1. Although relevant, evidence is not
admissible if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of
unfair prejudice, of confusion of the issues or of misleading the jury.

2. Although relevant, evidence may be
excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by considerations
of undue delay, waste of time or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

3. Evidence of another act or crime which
is so closely related to an act in controversy or a crime charged that an
ordinary witness cannot describe the act in controversy or the crime charged
without referring to the other act or crime shall not be excluded, but at the
request of an interested party, a cautionary instruction shall be given
explaining the reason for its admission.

1. The testimony of a witness who
previously has undergone hypnosis to recall events that are the subject matter
of the testimony is admissible if:

(a) The witness, or the parent or guardian of the
witness if the witness is a minor, gave informed consent to the hypnosis;

(b) The person who induced the hypnosis is:

(1) A provider of health care;

(2) A clinical social worker who is
licensed pursuant to chapter 641B of NRS;
or

(3) An officer or employee or former
officer or employee of a law enforcement agency,

Ę who is
trained in forensic hypnosis and who is not otherwise currently involved in the
investigation of a case or action in which the witness is a victim, witness or
defendant;

(c) Before the hypnosis was induced, a written
record was made that includes, without limitation:

(1) A description of the subject matter of
the hypnosis as provided by the witness; and

(2) The information that was provided to
the hypnotist concerning the subject matter of the hypnosis;

(d) The entire session at which the hypnosis was
induced was electronically recorded by audio or video recording equipment,
including, without limitation, any interview that was conducted before or after
the hypnosis was induced;

(e) The recording of the entire session at which
the hypnosis was induced was made available by the party who produced the
witness to each party involved in the case, pursuant to the discovery procedures
as provided in NRS 174.235 to 174.295, inclusive, the Nevada Rules of
Civil Procedure or the Justice Court Rules of Civil Procedure, depending upon
the nature of the proceedings; and

(f) The hypnotist and the witness were the only
persons present during the session of hypnosis unless the hypnotist or a law
enforcement officer who is investigating the criminal case, if any, determined
that it was necessary for one of the following persons to be present during the
session:

(1) A parent or guardian of a witness who
is a minor; or

(2) An artist employed by a law
enforcement agency.

2. The court, on its own motion or that of
a party, may exclude the testimony of a person who previously has undergone
hypnosis to recall events which are the subject matter of the testimony if the
court determines that such testimony is unreliable or is otherwise
inadmissible.

3. The court shall instruct the jury to
exercise caution when considering the reliability of the testimony of a person
who previously has undergone hypnosis to recall events that are the subject
matter of the testimony.

4. The provisions of this section do not
limit:

(a) The ability of a party to attack the
credibility of a witness who previously has undergone hypnosis to recall events
that are the subject matter of the witness’s testimony; or

(b) The legal grounds upon which to admit or
exclude the testimony of such a witness.

5. As used in this section, “provider of
health care” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 629.031.

NRS 48.045Evidence of character inadmissible to prove conduct; exceptions;
other crimes.

1. Evidence of a person’s character or a
trait of his or her character is not admissible for the purpose of proving that
the person acted in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except:

(a) Evidence of a person’s character or a trait
of his or her character offered by an accused, and similar evidence offered by
the prosecution to rebut such evidence;

(b) Evidence of the character or a trait of
character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, subject to the
procedural requirements of NRS 48.069 where
applicable, and similar evidence offered by the prosecution to rebut such
evidence; and

(c) Unless excluded by NRS 50.090, evidence of the character of a
witness, offered to attack or support his or her credibility, within the limits
provided by NRS 50.085.

2. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs or
acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that
the person acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for
other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation,
plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.

(Added to NRS by 1971, 781; A 1975, 1131)

NRS 48.055Methods of proving character.

1. In all cases in which evidence of
character or a trait of character of a person is admissible, proof may be made
by testimony as to reputation or in the form of an opinion. On
cross-examination, inquiry may be made into specific instances of conduct.

2. In cases in which character or a trait
of character of a person is an essential element of a charge, claim or defense,
proof of specific instances of the person’s conduct may be made on direct or
cross-examination.

(Added to NRS by 1971, 781; A 1979, 25)

NRS 48.059Habit; routine practice.

1. Evidence of the habit of a person or
the routine practice of an organization, whether corroborated or not and
regardless of the presence of eyewitnesses, is relevant to prove that the
conduct of the person or organization on a particular occasion was in conformity
with the habit or routine practice.

2. Habit or routine practice may be proved
by testimony in the form of an opinion or by specific instances of conduct
sufficient in number to warrant a finding that the habit existed or that the
practice was routine.

(Added to NRS by 1971, 781; A 1973, 25)

NRS 48.061Effects of domestic violence.

1. Except as otherwise provided in
subsection 2, evidence of domestic violence and expert testimony concerning the
effect of domestic violence, including, without limitation, the effect of
physical, emotional or mental abuse, on the beliefs, behavior and perception of
the alleged victim of the domestic violence that is offered by the prosecution
or defense is admissible in a criminal proceeding for any relevant purpose,
including, without limitation, when determining:

(a) Whether a defendant is excepted from criminal
liability pursuant to subsection 7 of NRS
194.010, to show the state of mind of the defendant.

(b) Whether a defendant in accordance with NRS 200.200 has killed another in
self-defense, toward the establishment of the legal defense.

2. Expert testimony concerning the effect
of domestic violence may not be offered against a defendant pursuant to
subsection 1 to prove the occurrence of an act which forms the basis of a
criminal charge against the defendant.

3. As used in this section, “domestic
violence” means the commission of any act described in NRS 33.018.

NRS 48.069Previous sexual conduct of victim of sexual assault: Procedure
for admission of evidence to prove victim’s consent.In
any prosecution for sexual assault or for attempt to commit or conspiracy to
commit a sexual assault, if the accused desires to present evidence of any
previous sexual conduct of the victim of the crime to prove the victim’s
consent:

1. The accused must first submit to the
court a written offer of proof, accompanied by a sworn statement of the
specific facts that the accused expects to prove and pointing out the relevance
of the facts to the issue of the victim’s consent.

2. If the court finds that the offer of
proof is sufficient, the court shall order a hearing out of the presence of the
jury, if any, and at the hearing allow the questioning of the victim regarding
the offer of proof.

3. At the conclusion of the hearing, if
the court determines that the offered evidence:

Ę the court
shall make an order stating what evidence may be introduced by the accused and
the nature of the questions which the accused is permitted to ask. The accused
may then present evidence or question the victim pursuant to the order.

NRS 48.071Exclusion of evidence of address and telephone number of victim
of sexual assault.

1. In any prosecution for sexual assault,
the district attorney may, by written motion upon reasonable prior notice to
the accused, move to exclude evidence of the victim’s address and telephone
number. The court may order that such evidence be excluded from the proceedings
if the court finds that the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by
the creation of substantial danger to the victim.

2. This section does not limit the
defendant’s right to discover or investigate such evidence.

(Added to NRS by 1977, 1630)

NRS 48.075Transactions and conversations with or actions of deceased
person.Evidence is not
inadmissible solely because it is evidence of transactions or conversations
with or the actions of a deceased person.

(Added to NRS by 1981, 411)

NRS 48.077Contents of lawfully intercepted communications.Except as limited by this section, in addition
to the matters made admissible by NRS
179.465, the contents of any communication lawfully intercepted under the
laws of the United States or of another jurisdiction before, on or after July
1, 1981, if the interception took place within that jurisdiction, and any
evidence derived from such a communication, are admissible in any action or
proceeding in a court or before an administrative body of this State,
including, without limitation, the Nevada Gaming Commission and the State
Gaming Control Board. Matter otherwise privileged under this title does not
lose its privileged character by reason of any interception.

(Added to NRS by 1981, 163)

NRS 48.095Subsequent remedial measures.

1. When, after an event, measures are
taken which, if taken previously, would have made the event less likely to
occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove
negligence or culpable conduct in connection with the event.

2. This section does not require the
exclusion of evidence of subsequent remedial measures when offered for another
purpose, such as proving ownership, control, feasibility of precautionary
measures, or impeachment.

(Added to NRS by 1971, 781)

NRS 48.105Compromise; offers to compromise.

1. Evidence of:

(a) Furnishing or offering or promising to
furnish; or

(b) Accepting or offering or promising to accept,

Ę a valuable
consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim which was
disputed as to either validity or amount, is not admissible to prove liability
for or invalidity of the claim or its amount. Evidence of conduct or statements
made in compromise negotiations is likewise not admissible.

2. This section does not require exclusion
when the evidence is offered for another purpose, such as proving bias or
prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of undue delay, or proving an
effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.

(Added to NRS by 1971, 781)

NRS 48.109Closure of meeting held to further resolution of dispute;
exclusion of admission, representation or statement made during mediation
proceedings; confidentiality of matter discussed during mediation proceeding.

1. A meeting held to further the
resolution of a dispute may be closed at the discretion of the mediator.

2. The proceedings of the mediation
session must be regarded as settlement negotiations, and no admission,
representation or statement made during the session, not otherwise discoverable
or obtainable, is admissible as evidence or subject to discovery.

3. A mediator is not subject to civil
process requiring the disclosure of any matter discussed during the mediation
proceedings.

NRS 48.115Payment of medical and similar expenses.Evidence of furnishing or offering or
promising to pay medical, hospital or similar expenses occasioned by an injury
is not admissible to prove liability for the injury.

(Added to NRS by 1971, 782)

NRS 48.125Withdrawn plea of guilty or guilty but mentally ill or offer to
plead guilty or guilty but mentally ill not admissible; plea of nolo contendere
or offer to plead nolo contendere not admissible.

1. Evidence of a plea of guilty or guilty
but mentally ill, later withdrawn, or of an offer to plead guilty or guilty but
mentally ill to the crime charged or any other crime is not admissible in a
criminal proceeding involving the person who made the plea or offer.

2. Evidence of a plea of nolo contendere
or of an offer to plead nolo contendere to the crime charged or any other crime
is not admissible in a civil or criminal proceeding involving the person who
made the plea or offer.

1. Evidence that a person was or was not
insured against liability is not admissible upon the issue whether the person
acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully.

2. This section does not require the
exclusion of evidence of insurance against liability when it is relevant for
another purpose, such as proof of agency, ownership or control, or bias or
prejudice of a witness.